If Chumash Bereishis is about the Avos, the Parents, then Chumash Shemot and the later Chumashim are all about the children. In the parents, there were events that happened in capsulated form, for example Avraham going down to Egypt, and coming back up with great wealth, which is an encapsulated form of golus Mitzraim that later happened with the children, the Bnei Israel.

Chumash Shemot begins with “elu Shemot Bnei Israel”, because from now on, we are going to be dealing with the children of the Avos, and how they experienced and completed that which the parent in symbolic and encapsulated form began in Chumash Bereishis.

The Rebbe says that it is like binah elaborated on chochma, or like Torah shebal pei, the Gemarrah, elaborating on the Torah she b’ksav, where the written Torah is very brief and concise and the Gemarrah elaborates, analyses and gives the details to what the Torah says.

The sicha for parshas Shemot is in Vol VI of Likkutei Sichos.

The Rebbe speaks about the rashi that explains the reason for the counting and the mentioning of the names of the shvatim who came down from Egypt. Since they were already counted and mentioned in Vayigash, why is it necessary to repeat again? One of the things that Rashi says is that Jews are compared to the stars, and just as G-d counts the stars, and calls each of them by their names, He treats the Jews the same way. He counts the stars and calls them by name, both when they are coming out, and when they are being gathered back in and the same is also true with the Jews. When the generation came down to Egypt, they were counted and then when that generation ended, by the end of the lifespan of the shvatim, they were counted again, and their names were mentioned, because by counting and by mentioning names, affection is expressed.

The Rebbe’s question is, since counting expresses affection, and referring to something by name expresses affection, why do we need both? Counting, giving something a number and calling something by name expresses different and almost opposite forms of affection. Numbering, by giving something a number, you are expressing that aspect of this particular item in which all of the counted items are equal. When you have a set of ten things for example, and each one is counted as one, then they are all equal in their significance; each of is one tenth. And so you are emphasizing the significance that they all share in common, something that they all have that makes them equal, each one of them is one, not more and not less than one.

On the other hand when you refer to something by its name, here you are expressing that which makes each of them different and separate from the others, because everyone has a different and separate name. And this is what Rashi is saying when he says Jews are compared to the stars, because in the stars we see these two things – on the one hand, there is that which all stars have in common, a star is a star, not more and not less. And on the other hand, each star has a unique and individual identity that makes it separate from all other stars.

This is what Rashi means that we are compared to the stars, because in Jews also we find these two things: first there is that which is precious about every Jew because we are all a part of G-d, we are all the children of Yakov, we are all G-d’s children, and we have one Father, this we all have in common. Then there is that quality that makes the individual Jew precious and special as an individual not as a part of the group. And this is expressed in the two forms of affection – counting and naming, as we will soon see.

The inner meaning is, according to Chassidus, that when G-d counted the Jewish people with their names, He was expressing a very special and unique affection. Counting means that the greatest in the group and the smallest in the group become united in that they are all one member of the group. In spite of the differences between them, there is a great overreaching virtue, something that is greater even than the virtues of the individual parts and in that they are all equal, and to express that is a form of affection.

With Jewish neshamas for example, there are great, high neshamas, and there are simple neshamas. Yet, as the Alter Rebbe says in Tanya, we have to have ahavas Israel to every Jew equally because there is that which is the great equalizer for all neshamas - we are all similar and we have one Father. So we are united in that fact and the virtue of having this Father and all being similar, this is referring not to some detail of the neshama but to the essence of the neshama. In the essence, if we trace ourselves back to our source, the Rock from which we are taken, there we are all equal, and that part of the neshama transcends the particular individual character and virtue.

So by counting, we are actually referring to that part of the neshama that is the essence of our neshama and transcends our differences and that’s why we can count each person as one, not more and not less, because in this we are all equal. So when we come to the essence of the neshama, there our differences fall away and we are all equal.

Now when you refer to someone by name, this too refers to the essence of the neshama, greater and higher than the particular talents of the neshama. How do we see this? A person’s name is the same all his life, even though in the course of his life, he goes through major changes, from childhood to his older years, and yet through it all, the same name is used and he responds to that same name throughout all the changes, which means that the name refers to that which is unchanging in the person. When you call someone by his name you are addressing that part of him that will never change, that is always the same.

So we see that we are referring to an essential condition in the person rather than a particular one which changes in the course of time. But since it isn’t the essence of the neshama that needs to be fixed, the avodah, the service is not with the essence of the neshama, but rather through its expressions and through its particular individual virtues. Therefore it is necessarily to bring the strength and the power of this unchanging and transcending essence of the neshama into the individual faculties and behaviors of everyday life, that which is the revealed part of the neshama in order serve G-d properly.

How does this happen?

The essence of the neshama has to be called forth and revealed into everyday life. That is why G-d counts the Jews and calls them by name, as Rashi says, to make known the affection that G-d has for the Jews. It is not enough that there is an affection, that G-d appreciates the essence of the neshama. He has to call it forth, make it known, to reveal this affection and reveal that part of the neshama for which G-d has the affection. How is this done? By counting and by referring to each by name.

We find for example, in the love of parents to children, which by the way devolves from the love that G-d has for us. This is why an only child is loved in a special way, more than if there are other children, because to G-d, the Jewish people is an only child, and therefore it is in our nature that an only child is loved more, in a special way, different than a child that has siblings. So this love that parents have for children which is an expression of G-d’s love for us, is expressed in many different ways.

Parents can express their affection by calling them by name, and by endearing the name, and this form of affection is greater than the other forms of affection, such as giving a present, speaking lovingly, or embracing or kissing. Giving of a gift for example, speaking lovingly, will change according to the age and maturity of the child. If you give a child a gift that is inappropriate for his age, if you give a grown child a gift that is appropriate for a small child, then that gift will not express affection. It can in fact be the opposite of affection.

So we see that a gift has to change according to the level and maturity of the child. Therefore a gift does not address the essence of a person. And because it is not the essence, it needs to keep adjusting and changing according to a particular level or particular condition in which the child is at a given time. The same is true with affectionate talk, expressing love verbally. When does that work? Only when the child is old enough to appreciate and understand what is being said. And since the loving conversation and the gift which are the tools through which the affection is being revealed, have to adjust to the age and the maturity of the child, we see that this is not the essence that we are talking to. We are talking to the intelligence of the child, we are talking to the emotions of the child, but not to the essence.

Even the love expressed through embracing and kissing also has its limitations. You can only embrace and kiss a child when the child is in close proximity, but over a distance that isn’t possible. So we see again that the essence of the child is not being addressed, but rather some finite physical part that has to be present in the room in order to be embraced or kissed. Only then does that affection get expressed. What’s more, the expression of affection that comes through a kiss is only appropriate when the child is aware that he is being kissed, not when he is asleep. And so again, this is not reaching the essence of the person; it is touching only the conscious part of the person.

Whereas referring to a person by name, here we see that this is unlimited, it has no restriction. It doesn’t change from childhood to adulthood, it doesn’t have to be in the same room where the person who is being loved is, but even from a distance, when you mention someone by name you are expressing affection. That’s because the name addresses the essence of the person. And so the affection also is for the essence and not for the particular details.

We see that these two forms of affection, counting and naming, although they both refer to the essence of the neshama, they are both referring to different states in the neshama.

The counting where all neshamas are equal, are the same, that’s the neshama as it is in heaven, before it comes down in a body. Whereas the naming, when you give the neshama a name, that’s referring to the essence of the neshama once it has already come down into a body. And that’s why it now has a name, because we know that in heaven souls don’t have names. A name comes into existence only when a child is born and then is given a name.

So the counting refers to the neshama as it is in heaven, and the naming refers to the neshama as it is on earth, as it comes into a body. By counting with the name we are bringing that part of the neshama that is higher than the body, that essence of the neshama as it remains in heaven, into affect and into expression in the part of the neshama that is in the body. And this is why this counting takes place in the Bnei Israel coming to Egypt, into the golus of Mitzraim, not like Yakov with his children, when they had the best seventeen years of Yakov’s life but when the golus is beginning, here it is necessary that the essence of the neshama be revealed in the part of the neshama that is in the body that is subjected to the golus, to the condition of golus. So that even in Mitzraim, even in a condition of golus, the neshama should illuminate even the details of a person’ s life, meaning the essence of the neshama should be felt in the name - the details and the parts of the personality and the behavior of the person should be permeated with the essence of the neshama.

Now this is done twice, as it says about the stars - G-d counts them when they come out and He counts them when He gathers them back in, which means the beginning of life and the end of life. And this works in two directions, the Rebbe says. On the one hand, the essence of the neshama, the counting, affects the name of the neshama, the part of the neshama that is in the body, so that the details of a person’s life, the details of a person’s personality are elevated and liberated from being fixed in a particular form and a particular style. If it seems a person has no choice but to be a certain way, the essence of the neshama illuminates that part of the personality and frees it to be what it needs to be, what it ought to be.

So the part of the neshama that is in the body benefits greatly from the essence of the neshama that is above the body, beyond the body. Then at the end of life, it reverses, where the part of the neshama that was in the body, now benefits the part of the neshama that was not. Because through the part of the neshama that was in the body, that served G-d through the mitzvahs, that only the neshama in the body can do, then the virtues and the merit that was accumulated by the neshama in the body benefits the essence of the neshama, which is enriched through the performance of mitzvahs that is possible only in the body.

In a different sicha on Shemot, the Rebbe says, in this parsha which deals with coming down to Mitzraim and eventually coming out of Mitzraim, we find a story about lashon hara. After Moshe had killed the Egyptian who was hitting a Jew, on the next day, he found two Jews, Dathan and Aviram, arguing where one raised his hand against the other, and Moshe said, wicked one, why are you hitting your friend? And then they turned to him and said, are you going to kill us like you killed the Egyptian? And so the Torah says, that Moshe was frightened and said, now I see that the matter is known. The simple meaning is Moshe was frightened because these people had seen him kill the Egyptian and now it would be known, and his life would be in danger. But Rashi says that according to the Midrash there is another meaning. What was Moshe afraid of? And what is it that now was known? Rashi says, that Moshe was concerned because he saw that there was lashon hara among Jews. And he said, now I am not so sure that the Jews are deserving of the geulah, of being redeemed from Egypt. And what is now known, so again, the Midrash says, until now, Moshe says, I wondered. What is it that the Jews were doing that more than all the seventy nations of the world, the Jews have to be enslaved. But now I see now that it is appropriate. Again because of lashon hara.

So the Rebbe asks, there were people in Egypt, who at the time of the Exodus, brought with them their idols. They were guilty of idolatry. And yet, there is nowhere mentioned that because of their sin of idolatry, they are not deserving of redemption. And here Moshe says, simply and obviously, that if there is lashon hara going on, then maybe they are not worthy of redemption. Why is lashon hara a greater sin than idolatry? If for idolatry you don’t lose your deservedness of coming out of Mitzraim, then why for lashon hara would you?

Briefly, the Rebbe explains that in lashon hara there are many aspects. There is of course the sin of lashon hara, the fact that it is prohibited, it is an aveira, and you are violating a commandment. In this, idolatry is a much more stringent commandment, a much greater violation, because it is one of the three sins for which you have to die rather than commit. So certainly in its being a sin, avodah zarah is a greater sin.

But then there is another aspect. There is the aspect of the damage and the effect that a sin has. In lashon hara, there is an extremely damaging aspect in that lashon hara damages both the one who speaks and the one who listens to lashon hara, as well as the person who is being spoken of. So in terms of damage, it is a greater than other sins. But that would not deny the Jewish people the right to redemption. There is another aspect of lashon hara. Lashon hara shows that people are not comfortable with each other. And this discomfort causes the person to speak negatively about another.

Now when G-d came to take us out of Mitzraim, He came to take us out as a people, as a nation – “ G-d came to take a nation out from among another nation .” And in order for this to be, we had to behave as a nation, we had to be in the condition of a nation, in the status of a nation. So it is not a question of punishment, that because the Jews were speaking lashon hara, therefore they were being punished, or they might be punished by not being taken out of Egypt, but rather, it was a natural condition, a natural consideration. G-d wants to take us out as a nation, and we are not a nation. We are not a people. We are fragmented individuals uncomfortable with each other.

So this was why Moshe was frightened and thought that maybe the Jews are not deserving of coming out of Egypt, of being redeemed, not as punishment for the sin of lashon hara, but simply because we hadn’t yet attained the status of a nation, and G-d wanted to take us out as a nation. Since coming out of Egypt was a preparation for the receiving of the Torah, for Matan Torah, which has to be as a nation, we had to leave Mitzraim as a nation. And as long as there was lashon hara, then we hadn’t in fact achieved the status of a people and remained a fragmented group.

And so the story of the lashon hara, is appropriate in this particular parsha, because here we are talking about becoming a nation through the exodus and through the geulah from Mitzraim, and we need to know that the obstacle towards that kind of redemption is when the people are fragmented and don’t behave as a nation.